Central Information Commission
Mr.N R Gupta vs All India Council For Technical ... on 12 November, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi-110067
Tel: +91-11-26105682
File No.CIC/DS/A/2011/003959/RM
Appellant: Shri N.R. Gupta, New Delhi
Public Authority: AICTE, New Delhi
Date of Hearing: 12.11.2012
Date of decision: 12.11.2012
Heard today, dated 12.11.2012.
Appellant is present along with Shri Mahesh Pal.
The Public Authority is absent.
The appellant was heard and records perused.
FACTS
Vide RTI dt 28.9.10 appellant had sought following information on three points with reference to MHRD letter dt 26.4.10 addressed to Chairman, AICTE relating to service conditions of Workshop Instructors.
i) Action taken by various officials of AICTE on the above letter.
ii) Names of officials who were required to take action on this letter.
iii) Copy of departmental instructions governing action to be taken on such letters.
2. CPIO vide letter dt 21.10.11 informed appellant that Workshop Instructors working in Diploma Level Technical Institutions does not come under the purview of AICTE.
3. Not satisfied with the response, he filed the present appeal.
4. The appellant submitted that he has not been provided a specific response to his RTI queries. As no one from the department was present, the views of the public authority could not be ascertained.
5. The Commission observes that PIO AICTE vide letter dt 14.12.10 (F No.RID/RTI/2010-11/2010) the appellant was informed that his case will be put up before the Pay Committee for their consideration and decision taken would be communicated. Vide another letter dt 21.10.11, the Commission was informed that the requisite information has already been provided to the appellant vide their letter referred to above. It also mentions that Workshop Instructor working in diploma level technical institution does not come under the purview of AICTE. The reply to three queries quoted at para no.1 above, have not been provided to the appellant even now.
6. The Commission is concerned to note that the PIO has neither replied nor appeared before the Commission today.
7. A notice be issued to the PIO AICTE to show cause as to why action should not be initiated against him u/s 20(1) of the RTI Act, for obstructing in furnishing the information sought by the appellant. His written submissions should reach the Commission within three weeks from date of receipt of the order.
8. The Commission also directs the Chairman, AICTE, Prof S.S.Mantha to review the existing RTI machinery in his organisation with a view to ensuring that the provisions of the RTI Act are implemented in letter and spirit. Measures taken by the AICTE, in this regard, be intimated to the Commission.
9. A final view would be taken by the Commission on receipt of written submissions from the PIO and Chairman.
Sd/-
(Rajiv Mathur) Central Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy forwarded to :
Shri N R Gupta Qtr. No. 22/2, Sector -2,D.I.Z.Area, Lal Bahadur Sadan, Gole Market, New Delhi - 110001 The Asstt. Director & CPIO(RTI Cell) AICTE, 4th Floor, East Tower, NBCC Place, Bhishma Pitamah Marg, Pragati Vihar, Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110003 The Director & First Appellate Authority (RTI Cell) AICTE, 4th Floor, East Tower, NBCC Place, Bhishma Pitamah Marg, Pragati Vihar, Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110003 (Raghubir Singh) Deputy Registrar .11.2012 4